Abstract
Ethical guidelines protecting medical research participants have been criticized for stripping the sociocultural contexts of research. This critique is urgent considering ongoing calls to account for participant diversity in recruitment and inclusion procedures. Our intersectional analysis of illness narratives explores how sociostructural factors might play a role in participants’ exposure to research-related harm in clinical trials. Although widening participation does respond to generalizability concerns, we argue that gendered, classed, and ableist processes of self-silencing could simultaneously enhance risk of harm for participants with multiple oppressed identities. To prevent this, researchers might actively involve participants when designing trials.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 51 |
| Number of pages | 75 |
| Journal | International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics |
| Early online date | 30 Aug 2022 |
| Publication status | Published - 30 Aug 2022 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Keywords
- clinical trials
- diversity in research
- populations
- intersectionality
- research ethics and social justice
- self-silencing
- vulnerability
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of '“Who Am I to Judge These Things”: Intersectional Dimensions of Self-Silencing of People with a Neuromuscular Disease in a Clinical Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver